Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Panel Member Wants Vow From Specter
W Post ^ | November 11, 2004 | Helen Dewar

Posted on 11/12/2004 2:27:51 PM PST by swilhelm73

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-147 next last

1 posted on 11/12/2004 2:27:51 PM PST by swilhelm73
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73

How much is a "vow from Spector" worth?


2 posted on 11/12/2004 2:28:21 PM PST by housewife101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: housewife101

A "vow from Spector", now that is an oxymoron.


3 posted on 11/12/2004 2:29:21 PM PST by vannrox (The Preamble to the Bill of Rights - without it, our Bill of Rights is meaningless!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73

No, no, no, no! These vows, promises or whatever aren't good enough. Bork the Specter!


4 posted on 11/12/2004 2:30:18 PM PST by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73

Does Scottish law allow this sort of vow???


5 posted on 11/12/2004 2:31:05 PM PST by lnbchip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WillRain; guitarist; hansel; Former Military Chick; El Oviedo; Agitate; Prolifeconservative; ...

Stop Specter Ping


6 posted on 11/12/2004 2:31:31 PM PST by Syco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73

Specter has broken his word repeatedly. I assume he told Rove that if Bush helped him in Pennsylvania, he would help Bush. Ha.

Specter is going to be meeting in the back room with the Democrats on the committee. Does anyone think Specter can be prevented from making whatever deals he likes? Does anyone think he will keep a promise if the situation changes and Bush is weakened by media attacks? Will he keep the promise after Bush leaves office?

We have a window of four years to straighten out our judiciary. We can't afford to let the whole thing ride on a corrupt liar.


7 posted on 11/12/2004 2:32:04 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: housewife101
nut-in 0 nada...
8 posted on 11/12/2004 2:33:11 PM PST by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73

The Republicans are really willing to gamble their electoral majority in order to preserve the rules of seniority in the Senate.

Wow.

Two simple predictions:

(1) Given Specter's character, he is likely to block pro-life nominees, if not directly, by subterfuge, and if he does,

(2) The Democrats will pick up a lot of seats in 2006, because the pro-life voters will stay home. And the Democratic nominee will win the Presidency in 2008 too.

The Republicans are gambling everything on the feckless Arlen Specter.
They are doing it because they really don't connect the dots, or they really don't believe that pro-life voters will abandon them if they don't use their full power to advance the pro-life agenda.

It's a calculated gamble.
So, Republicans, your fate will rest in the integrity of Arlen Specter. Because your leaders have chosen to make it this way when they didn't have to. Hold your breath and cross your fingers that everything will turn out ok, because there's not much else to do.

Depressing, really.


9 posted on 11/12/2004 2:33:33 PM PST by Vicomte13 (Auta i Lome!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73
Specter WAS a Democrat.

Vlad Harkonen: "NEVER trust a traitor, even if he is yours."

10 posted on 11/12/2004 2:34:28 PM PST by Diogenesis ("Then I say unto you, send men to summon ... worms. And let us go to Fallujah to collect heads.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73

Pa voted Kerry Specter is form Pa. he needs Pa. to keep his job , He will be more worried about his job than any promise he makes to Bush. Why take a chance dump him.


11 posted on 11/12/2004 2:34:54 PM PST by sgtbono2002 (I aint wrong, I aint sorry , and I am probably going to do it again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

I have called and e-mailed Cornyn a bunch because he is my Senator. Just from his remarks, I think he feels this is the best they would get. Specter has been in Senate a long time and I have a feeling he knows where the bodies are buried (so to speak).

If there was a clause in a statement (signed) that said that he would agree to step down, if he broke his promise, it might work. I just don't think we will get him out of chairmanship.

I truly think Cornyn would be one that would vote against having Specter as chairman.


12 posted on 11/12/2004 2:35:48 PM PST by Txsleuth (Proud to be a Texan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73

with this, specter is in... sad.


13 posted on 11/12/2004 2:36:21 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73

Well, I don't think that's right. On the one hand, if he means that MacSpectre would be OBLIGED to VOTE FOR **any** pro-life candidate... well, how could he do that? Suppose a Klansman or Nazi who happened to be pro-life was nominated? I know it wouldn't happen with W, but I just mean it doesn't seem a fair commitment to demand.

If it means that MacSpectre would vow not to vote against a nominee JUST for being pro-life... how is that useful? I mean, of course he'd say it was for something else. How would we know whether he meant it? It's like the "health of the mother" exception to abortion; could mean anything.

Besides, is this what we really want -- a commitment on how he'd finally vote? Or do we want a chair who'd have fair and prompt hearings, and then send the nominee to the full Senate? I mean, yeah, I'd rather at least every GOP senator support anyone W would be likely to nominate... but is that a fair *demand*?

Dan


14 posted on 11/12/2004 2:36:46 PM PST by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lnbchip

"not proven"


15 posted on 11/12/2004 2:37:27 PM PST by RWR8189 (Its Morning in America Again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73

If he is made chairman we will live to regret it. Bringing candidates for an up-down vote is one thing, fighting for President Bush's appointments is another.

In an interview with Sean Hannity he called Justice Thomas "satisfactory" when asked whether he would support him for Chief Justice. I don't consider that a ringing endorsement of Justice Thomas.

He (Specter) is going to be touble.


16 posted on 11/12/2004 2:38:29 PM PST by Moconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002
"He will be more worried about his job than any promise he makes to Bush. Why take a chance dump him."

"integrity, integrity, integrity"

17 posted on 11/12/2004 2:39:02 PM PST by Diogenesis ("Then I say unto you, send men to summon ... worms. And let us go to Fallujah to collect heads.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Vicomte13
They are doing it because they really don't connect the dots, or they really don't believe that pro-life voters will abandon them if they don't use their full power to advance the pro-life agenda.

It is far more then just the issue of abortion, as big as that might be.

No conservative, or even believer in representative government, can abide by an unaccountable and unelected judiciary making law.

In the past there were real reasons that the Reps could not stop the imperial judiciary.

Now, however, they should be on strong enough footing to do what they were elected to do and end this anti-constitutional outrage by appointing strict constructionists to the Supreme Court.

This is why I not only voted for Reps, but worked for them this election season.

If the Reps fail to deliver now then they are not deserving of my vote or time. And millions will come to the same conclusion...
18 posted on 11/12/2004 2:39:22 PM PST by swilhelm73 (I voted for Bush. You're welcome.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73

Specter is about as carefree with the truth as is John F Kerry
its no wonder they are so attracted to each other..


19 posted on 11/12/2004 2:41:56 PM PST by joesnuffy ("The merit of our Constitution was, not that it promotes democracy, but checks it." Horatio Seymour)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73

"I not only voted against Bork, I led the charge against him."

- Arlen Specter

20 posted on 11/12/2004 2:41:58 PM PST by glock rocks ("I not only voted against Bork, I led the charge against him." -- Arlen Specter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-147 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson